But if I go around calling the table a sword and people give me quizzical looks and then I get all upset that people are infringing upon my rights to name things the way I want them even though it leads to nothing but confusion...

Well, he is not speaking from that perspective as far as I can see... It is more of a they have never seen that object before and have no concept of what it might be. So they call it a "insert new word here". Perhaps they call it the manufactured mesa, or they call it the wooden flat thing. Who cares, they will still likely use it as a table or see it for what it is.

NoahJ"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi

Well, he is not speaking from that perspective as far as I can see... It is more of a they have never seen that object before and have no concept of what it might be. So they call it a "insert new word here". Perhaps they call it the manufactured mesa, or they call it the wooden flat thing. Who cares, they will still likely use it as a table or see it for what it is.

They may not have a use for a table. I don't think you can take this as a given.

Certainly there are many things that are essential to us in the West that non-Western cultures would not have a use for and vice versa.

What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad

Anyway, sego. You're an atheist, too. Well, for everything short of the GCG. Everyone's an atheist to some extent. There's a whole host of irrational beliefs in deities that have been long forgotten to which we no longer subscribe. What drives me nuts is how people can be so dismissive of "silly old myths" but still believe wholeheartedly in a slightly newer one.

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” -Sagan

I'm always puzzled by this bit of thinking that declares a short poke of comedic mockery and reasoning are one in the same.

Are you referring to the Gervaise quote?

If so then it is instructional to note that the analogy is in no way an equivalence. That won't stop them using it time and again though.

In oder to counter the God argument (I mean God here not GCG) then they HAVE to bring it into their own domain - ie the Believer says 'God is non-material' and the answer is 'prove that in material terms'.

It is exactly the same as when a rationalist asks a Fundie to explain something and the Fundie references the Bible as 'proof'.

It's the same line of approach (I can't say 'line of reasoning') and it fails in both cases.

What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad

From where do they postulate this argument? It arises from the material world, from their material brains. They tell it to other material beings. They often want those other material beings to show up in other material locations and even give material things. Seems like there's plenty of material shit going on here. It doesn't take much to see that their arguments really immaterial.

See? See what I did there? TURBOPUNS!

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” -Sagan

From where do they postulate this argument? It arises from the material world, from their material brains.

How do you know?

Many religious experiences are completely immaterial.

Your argument only holds good if you accept they 'made it all up' - which you do. But that does not make it the case.

Quote:

They tell it to other material beings. They often want those other material beings to show up in other material locations and even give material things. Seems like there's plenty of material shit going on here.

True. The followers of religion do as you say and you are quite correct in your analysis.

That does not mean that the originators and founders were the same - but I have that deja vu again and feel we have walked this road before...

Quote:

It doesn't take much to see that their arguments really immaterial.

Doesn't take much for YOU. But then -once again - you are not the benchmark. Fortunately.

Quote:

See? See what I did there?

Yes...failed to grasp the whole very basic idea... best not to draw attention to it though shhhhh

What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad

Except we live in a material world. Trumpet, will you be my material girl?

No I won't be your material girl since I'm a man. You'd have to settle for me being your material reach-around buddy. You're the bottom of course.

Quote:

Originally Posted by segovius

But the argument postulated is that there is more than the material world.

You can't counter the argument in purely material terms - well, you can and you do but you know what I mean.

Or do you? I wonder....

I find it interesting no one I've read here has brought up the multi-verse theory which attempts to deal with the impossible to rationalize away massive amounts of order and convenient laws and characterists of our universe. The multiverse theory makes all religions look like the most sane and rationale people in the room by far.

No I won't be your material girl since I'm a man. You'd have to settle for me being your material reach-around buddy. You're the bottom of course.

I can come back later....

Quote:

I find it interesting no one I've read here has brought up the multi-verse theory which attempts to deal with the impossible to rationalize away massive amounts of order and convenient laws and characterists of our universe. The multiverse theory makes all religions look like the most sane and rationale people in the room by far.

I brought it up once - I think it was along with quotes from Hawking and Einstein showing they were not atheists - fuses started glowing red and circuits went into meltdown so we've avoided it since on compassionate grounds.

What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad

I brought it up once - I think it was along with quotes from Hawking and Einstein showing they were not atheists - fuses started glowing red and circuits went into meltdown so we've avoided it since on compassionate grounds.

Critics claim that many of these theories lack empirical testability, and without hard physical evidence are unfalsifiable; outside the methodology of scientific investigation to confirm or disprove.

However since we like quoting the reasoning and quips of famous people to make our points too, let's just go with this one.

Quote:

Trey Parker- "Basically ... out of all the ridiculous religion stories which are greatly, wonderfully ridiculous the silliest one I've ever heard is, 'Yeah ... there's this big giant universe and it's expanding, it's all gonna collapse on itself and we're all just here just 'cause ... just 'cause'. That, to me, is the most ridiculous explanation ever."

But they are experienced in material ways. Material things happen to the neurons in the material brains. Everything we experience is material when it comes down to it. Our thoughts, feelings, fears, observations...they all derive from material pulses in our material brains. Sorry buddy.

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” -Sagan

I find it interesting no one I've read here has brought up the multi-verse theory which attempts to deal with the impossible to rationalize away massive amounts of order and convenient laws and characterists of our universe. The multiverse theory makes all religions look like the most sane and rationale people in the room by far.

Says the person who probably doesn't even come close to having the knowledge of the complex mathematics behind such predictions. The point is no one worth half his salt is saying "THIS IS ABSOLUTELY THE CASE AND I WILL NOT WAVER FROM IT NO MATTER WHAT CONTRADICTORY EVIDENCE IS INTRODUCED".

And I like that Trey Parker quote. The answer of "just cause" is a lazy one. The proper is answer is "I don't know, let's find out." "Just cause" is just as lazy is "god did it." I say both of those idiotic responses are bullshit.

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” -Sagan

Says the person who probably doesn't even come close to having the knowledge of the complex mathematics behind such predictions. The point is no one worth half his salt is saying "THIS IS ABSOLUTELY THE CASE AND I WILL NOT WAVER FROM IT NO MATTER WHAT CONTRADICTORY EVIDENCE IS INTRODUCED".

And I like that Trey Parker quote. The answer of "just cause" is a lazy one. The proper is answer is "I don't know, let's find out." "Just cause" is just as lazy is "god did it." I say both of those idiotic responses are bullshit.

My mathematical abilities are not of importance here. The point of the multiverse is that there is no way to every prove it. It is not falsifiable. Falsifiability is what causes folks like yourself to give science the high ground over other disciplines.

You fail to realize that since the multiverse has been introduced as an answer to cosmological discussions, just cause is about all anyone can prove.

My mathematical abilities are not of importance here. The point of the multiverse is that there is no way to every prove it.

Oh ye with little imagination. There is no way that you can CONCEIVE of to prove it, sure. But completely impossible to prove? I don't know. I don't have that kind of high level math and physics to say definitively. Eventually our understanding of the universe may allow for a test to be designed and carried out.

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” -Sagan

And I like that Trey Parker quote. The answer of "just cause" is a lazy one. The proper is answer is "I don't know, let's find out." "Just cause" is just as lazy is "god did it." I say both of those idiotic responses are bullshit.

The basic problem here is that the BBT is a scientific theory of the origins of the universe (or, the "how") rather than a philosophical one (the "why"), and he is being disingenuous by conflating them.

Oh ye with little imagination. There is no way that you can CONCEIVE of to prove it, sure. But completely impossible to prove? I don't know. I don't have that kind of high level math and physics to say definitively. Eventually our understanding of the universe may allow for a test to be designed and carried out.

Apparently you've not read up on this or else you would know that imagination has nothing to do with it.

The basic problem here is that the BBT is a scientific theory of the origins of the universe (or, the "how") rather than a philosophical one (the "why"), and he is being disingenuous by conflating them.

From the initial portion of the article:

Quote:

[The term was coined in 1895 by the American philosopher and psychologist William James.[1] The various universes within the multiverse are sometimes called parallel universes.

The structure of the multiverse, the nature of each universe within it and the relationship between the various constituent universes, depend on the specific multiverse hypothesis considered. Multiverses have been hypothesized in cosmology, physics, astronomy, philosophy, transpersonal psychology and fiction, particularly in science fiction and fantasy. In these contexts, parallel universes are also called "alternative universes", "quantum universes", "interpenetrating dimensions", "parallel dimensions", "parallel worlds", "alternative realities", and "alternative timelines", among others.

Sounds highly Scientific... Philosophically speaking...

NoahJ"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi

Oh ye with little imagination. There is no way that you can CONCEIVE of to prove it, sure. But completely impossible to prove? I don't know. I don't have that kind of high level math and physics to say definitively. Eventually our understanding of the universe may allow for a test to be designed and carried out.

Hey, if your math is high enough level can you prove God exists?

NoahJ"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi

It depends on how you define god. It depends on if there is a testable hypothesis. If you automatically say that god is beyond the realm of human comprehension, you've made your premise untestable and rather pointless.

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” -Sagan

It depends on how you define god. It depends on if there is a testable hypothesis. If you automatically say that god is beyond the realm of human comprehension, you've made your premise untestable and rather pointless.

I have never made any such assertion. I know all us Christians sound alike, but...

I don't know how one would go about testing for the existence of God, but just because I don't know how to do it does not mean it cannot be done.

For example: God, being a creator would leave "a fingerprint" so to speak on his creation. If one could figure out what the print is, it could be tested for as one possibility. It would be everywhere.

There are many things, many ways that are possible ways to test. I know that you will not simply accept the existence at face value, and I am ok with that. I just wanted to know if you were against his existence altogether, or just against "blind acceptance" of it.

NoahJ"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi